On 20 Feb 01, at 17:08, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> On 2/19/01 9:58 PM, "Peter Losher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I have recently been dealing with an issue that I hope I can get some advice
> > on here. On one of the lists that I maintain & administer, I have had
> > individuals reportedly attack individuals via personal email about things that
> > they have posted on this particular list. ...
[...]
> I've always been a proponent of the "if it happens because of my mail list,
> I have a responsibility to it", so my rules have always made it clear that
> abuse by private mail isn't tolerated. This has gotten me some flack from
> other admins at times, who prefer a more hands-off approach, and from users
> who want to tell me it's none of my business -- but when situations are
> unclear online, I look for real-world comparisons to judge with.
>
> In this case, since I like the sports-bar analogy (and I'm the bartender),
> it's similar to the case where two folks get into a argument in the bar, and
> then one leaves and waits for the other in the parking lot, and then jumps
> him. Virtually, you're still on bar property, but not IN the bar, and the
> situation was caused while they were in the bar.
One thing that's nice about analogies is that they're like standards -
- there are so many to choose among. In this case, I rather disagree
with your choice of analogy because of the notion of "Virtual bar
property". I can find no analogy between a random user doing
something on their own, on their own computer, in the comfort of
their home [or wherever], hours or days after the original submission
to a list and a continuation of a fight in a bar parking lot.
Where, exactly, are the analogy boundaries of the 'virtual parking
lot' and to what extent does an analogy argument have to start "in
the bar" for the problem to be on our watch?
For my money/time, it seems that the problems involved in getting in
the middle of these kinds of spats FAR outweigh just telling the
offended party to put the offender in their email-killfile and be
done with it. [among the problems: what if the 'offender' isn't
apparently on your list of subscribers? do you now volunteer your
time to track down who the miscreant actually is to figure out the
right 'match'? Do you need to keep a perpetual "banned from
resubscribing" list [lest the miscreant just resubscribe to the
list?] Do you have to play detective and investigate to verify their
claim of attack and verify its source, (or could someone use this to
get folks they don't like kicked from the list?)
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep <--
